Legal Opinion

Kansas City Southern Ry. Co. v. United States

District Court, W.D. Missouri

Decided December 31, 1926No. 704PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Per curiam

The petitioners have filed their bill in equity to annul and suspend two certain orders of the Interstate Commerce Commission, wherein it made final the valuation provided for in section 19a of the Interstate Commerce Act. Moreover, they seek to enjoin the use of said valuations by said Commission. The action proceeds against the United States. The Interstate Commerce Commission has intervened. The government challenges the jurisdiction- of the court in the controversy, and the inter-vener insists that the. proceedings before the *593Interstate Commerce Commission were marked with such regularity…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Smyth v. AmesSupreme Court of the United States · 1898
  2. Smyth v. Ames; Smyth v. Smith; Smyth v. HigginsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1898
  3. Interstate Commerce Commission v. Union Pacific RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1912
  4. Int. Com. Comm. v. Louis. & Nash. RRSupreme Court of the United States · 1913
  5. Louisville & Nashville Railroad v. GarrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1913

15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. (SS) Carrillo v. Commissioner of Social SecurityDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2021
  2. Aquino v. Commissioner of Social SecurityDistrict Court, W.D. Washington · 2020
  3. Cappello Global, LLC v. Temsa Ulasim Arclari Sanayi Ve Ticaret A.S.District Court, C.D. California · 2024
  4. Cooper v. BerryhillDistrict Court, S.D. California · 2020
  5. Gov Guam v. Torres & O'KeefeSuperior Court of Guam · 2012

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API